![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Jun 8, 1:54 pm, Paul kgyy wrote:
Will it really peak in 5 years? I think not. Google Thomas Gold and non-biogenic oil and you will find that the party line may not be true. Not sure about the peak - depends on how good the reserve estimates of the Saudis are, but then we know they never lie, do they? Thomas Gold and Fred Hoyle were astronomers who between them came up with a number of pretty wild ideas, one of which was that Venus would turn out to be solid petrocarbons. So far, apparently Sweden has actually found 80 barrels of oil in their test of Gold's hypothesis after spending $$millions of dollars drilling in crystalline rock. But the source of that 80 barrels might just be percolation from nearby oilbearing strata. Would you feel any better if production peaks in 10 years instead of 5 in the face of increasing demand? The amount of oil wasn't the point, the fact that there were 80 barrels of oil in what has been considered non-oil bearing rock (granite) at a depth where it shouldn't be is a strong support for the non-biogenic theory. Russia looked at the results of this experiment and decided to explore the Dneiper river basin, a place where conventional theory said oil wouldn't be likely. That basin is now the largest oil producing field in all of Russia. There is a technical paper written by a couple of Russian petroleum engineers on this topic that I have read, it is very interesting. Western oil companies continue to publicly poo-poo the non-biogenic theory, but the Russians seem to have adopted it. Coal is clearly biogenic, but there is a lot of coal in the world which can account for ancient plant and animal life trapped in the earth. Oil comes from very deep down, and it is harder to believe that dead plants and animals could be responsible for all that oil at such great depths. The recent findings that the oil in one of the Gulf of Mexico fields was being replenished from a deeper source via a fault line (reported in the Wall Street Journal) also tends to support this theory. Thomas Gold was right about the composition of the surface of the moon, and of the nature of pulsars, and has been right about a lot of other things that were initially considered far out. Time will tell, but I think there is a lot of merit in the non-biogenic theory. While people believe that the supply of oil is very limited, the prices will remain high. If it is found that the supply is way underestimated, the value of the oil will drop (standard commodity rules apply) which is not in the best interest of the oil companies or OPEC. I expect that we will be told that the oil supply will peak in 5 years for at least the next 100 years. It will just always be 5 years away from whatever day they happen to say it. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| You can tell high fuel prices ... | john smith | Piloting | 0 | August 17th 06 08:09 PM |
| High fuel prices = buyer's market? | Greg Copeland[_1_] | Owning | 22 | August 7th 06 12:15 PM |
| IVO pireps wanted.. high performance/high speed... | Dave S | Home Built | 8 | June 2nd 04 05:12 PM |
| 'Chicken-Hawk' argument doesn't fly | Vaughn | Military Aviation | 1 | February 24th 04 11:47 PM |
| 'Chicken-Hawk' argument doesn't fly | Vaughn | Naval Aviation | 0 | February 24th 04 12:18 PM |